tv [untitled] September 8, 2014 5:30am-6:01am PDT
1976 architectural district the building was never evaluated for individual eligibility or association with goldberg. based on initial review the building may qualify due to significant artful expression and building containing rare historying store fronts and may qualify based on the connection to goldberg. a san francisco native and member of the locally prominent jewish family. he began working for the san francisco chronicle. the cartoonist stayed in the building and used it as a studio during his frequent visits to san francisco. the association with goldberg including his occasional use of the building including his long tenure use of the city requires
significant review. this document the lends and as well as identify other entities. included in the case report an additional communication to the commissioners are letters of support for designation from the long time residential tenants jackie taylor who nominated the building for landmark status and supervisors linden breed and the city has hired a landmark designation report. last week i spoke with ken hersh, the building's owner and received more information about the building as well as his preference the building not be landmarked.
>> the second recent nomination for landmark status is the old lady's home. an assisted living facity in the potrero neighborhood. it was defined by the coffee -- and construct in 1932. the building replaces the circa 1980 building. in june a nearby resident submitted an application nominated the home and followed up by submitting a petition to preserving the building. this morning i received a letter from david campos to support the landmark designation. >> based on initial review, the building may qualify for local designation for it's architectural
significance and an appears to be relative to data construction. more data and couples to is necessary for eligibility for landmark status as a charitable significance or for potential significance for pioneer california an fill -- philanthropy. finally the landmark was also designated for landmark designation. the exhibition of queenian. it replaces the family's earlier farm house moved to the dairy in the 1970s. the was located in an area.
the building was included in several recent historic buildings and 1986 architectural is survey. early july a nearby resident requested the building be designated as a local landmark and provided it's history with association with the family. based on the review the building may qualify which appears architecturally significant. the building may also qualify due to its association with the pioneering language -- lang and connected. this morning i received a letter of support for designation from a member of the public. in the case report are several options for the hpc to consider
including add anything or all of the properties to the landmark designation program. requesting more information from project applicants and directing staff to prioritize any or all of these properties over all the properties on the work program. this concludes my presentation and i'm available for questions. >> thank you. commissioners, do we have any questions for staff at this time? >> i just have a point of order. we talking about all of these three at the same time. should we split out the carl street property so mr. pearlman can participate too. >> why don't we take 1 first. until we officially recuse him, right. exactly. i thought he was taking a break.
>> while we got him here. let's get the other two done and then we'll ge getd you recused. so any public speaker. we'll take this one at a time. public speaking we'll hold the call until the end for public speaking. i have several speaker cards. we are starting in order with the gough street property and first is beverly upton.
>> good afternoon commissioners, i'm happy to be here today and see that we are making progress. i'm joined by my neighbor, jackie nailer. we are excited because the project is moving forward and attention is being and focused on this beautiful building. we were so worried about it's future and happy to have been it's tenant for almost 25 years. we are excited . we brought almost everything new we have one more new letter. we would like to and this supervisor breed and paul henderson, jennifer george, and so we put them altogether in
a new packet for the commissioners so you would have the most up to date letters. i think there is a couple new once in there. with that, we are very excited to see this moving forward. as you will remember when we were here before we brought you some information and photos on the inside and outside of the bg blg. then this last time we were here we caught about goldberg's daughter, doing a designs and jewelry in her efforts to secure and expert to do the report on our building. so that's our next step now is to start working with our expert. swoe that -- so with that i will turn it with jackie nay ler who has been in this building for 25 years. >> thank you so much and thank you for your continued consideration of this beautiful building .
we really appreciate it. last time as beverly said we had for members of the community press and our civic leaders to raise awareness for the building. the chronicle will be doing a story later this month which will come out in the pink section which is exciting. we were able to raise funds to hire architectural historian to complete the landmark report. after much consideration we selected yarbrough with ics international and with that i just want to introduce edward yarbrough. >> that is an order wechlt normally don't do public comment this way. it just happens to be in order. your time will start now. >> very good, thank you. i have had an initial
inspection of the property and want to focus on the integrity. it's really a remarkable building. the two commercial spaces upstairs have been intentionally preserved from the period from when rue goldberg lived and her father and me , a mural by diego rivera. three commercial buildings downstairs with very high integrity. the list of character defining features that are typically missing and scene some of our better preserved buildings that are still present in this building is remarkable. some secondary associations that i think that make this even
more stand out beyond what we know about rue goldberg association there are his father again, max goldberg who is a sheriff in san francisco and then also there is initial evidence that the bay area reporter, the first lgbt publication in the west was initiated in beverly unit. so they may have associations with that thematically which is a thematic theme historying -- historic building in san francisco. i just started and there is lots of work but thank you very much for hearing about this wonderful resource. >> ms. can yus. >> good afternoon, my name is
anna can yus. my home has been in hayes valley and with hayes value continuing to grow, i live right next store with a five 5 story building. it's i mperative, that we conserve our cultural heritage of these types of buildings in san francisco. assets such as this goldberg building, there has been a lot of discussion about creating community as i have sat here and listened until the opportunity to speak and i think this is an amazing opportunity to knit together historical and contemporary in one community. so that it reflects not only the diversity, rather this will reflect not only the diversity of san francisco as a people, but
also reflection in it's building as well creating this environment. so thank you. >> mr. yelleda? >> good afternoon, commissioner. as you know, i'm retired civil engineer. today i'm here with regard to university ladies home 350 university street. this building was built in 1930. this historic building is home for seniors in san francisco district. once founded in 1884 with $100,000 and benefactors of late observatory to provide assisted living for
both women and men of motion tion modest mean. this is designed by san francisco jay risk and it's features at george an revival exterior the spanish colonial style especially in the common areas such and front and chapel and dining room. this building has all the significant architectural features as a historic building and i'm asking you to apply for it as a historic building. thank you. >> thank you, any other member of the public wish to speak on either of the gough street property or university property. at this time we'll interrupt public comment if we can get a motion to
recuse. >> why don't we do a discussion on this almost and come back. >> yeah. good idea. i will close public comment for now. we'll come back to it. we'll recuse commissioner pearlman. any other member of the public? we'll close public comment at this time and bring it back to commission. commissioners? mr. frye? >> commissioners, tim frye, staff department. one issue on the goldberg building, staff understand the significance of some of the interiors and the high level integrity on the interior of the building. however our code is rather limited in what we can designate in private interiors. generally we are limited to only publically accessible areas such as
commercial spaces, lobby, etc. while the commission want to pursue landmark designation we have to look at areas that are identified as protected in certain sense as required a certificate of appropriateness. there may be other features of the building but they may not be protected by the designation in the future. just wanted to let you know that while you are considering that property. >> commissioner pearlman? >> that was one of my questions. but, i do want to just reiterate, i said this before. i grew up. my father knew all about rue goldberg and i saw a lot of the drawings and -- rue goldberg is something that touched my family. i'm excited about this
particular building. i'm hoping we'll be able to get the information from the historian and move this as quickly as we can. on the other one, i don't know the building. i haven't had a chance but i will go out and take a look and look forward to learning more about it and expanding our landmark program. >> commissioners, any other comments? >> commissioner johnck? >> i do think we need more information about these two properties so that we can proceed in a way that is as thorough as we have done in the past. >> commissioner hyland? >> i had a question for staff 689 -- the future action, is this informational item only and the future action what will come before us again once we or can we decide toed
to add these? >> you can decide to add today. in the past you have added property to the landmark program without a resolution. >> commissioner johnck? >> i guess, more on that. so we have this information and then what more work would be needed? yes, more information, but compared to other buildings on the landmark program. we just had a couple meetings ago. >> my understanding that the rue goldberg building the consultant will fast track the report and have it ready in december and bring it to the commission as soon as possible. for the other building, the ladies home, there is very little historical information beyond the general outline
that i provided. so a landmark designation report would be required. if the commission is interested to add it to the work program that could be added to the cue. there is approximately 15 or 16 buildings currently on the work program and the commission could prioritize it or not on the work program. >> okay. and while you are at the mic, are either, are there any projects coming forward on either of these addresses? >> not that i am aware of. >> okay. commissioner hyland? >> i just have a concern and that is that, i'm totally in support of adding any appropriate project to the landmarks program, but we don't seem to have enough resources in order to process these and just learning today that we did not get the one head count
in order to pursue this forward. do we need to agenda ized further discussion to have a further conversation about moving this forward. we have made several projects on landmark but they have been initiated. we need some resources to identify this progress. >> mr. frye and i have spoken on this previously outside of this chamber in how do we track and follow our monthly allocation, and what i always worry about is that we have staff that is doing both active, private enterprise projects as well as landmark background research for the work program. and, everyone is hot to get these other projects done because there is a time issue for our sponsor
but then our history k program sort lags because there is not on the front burner if you will. i think we do need to come up with a way, is it that one staff person has pulled and put per quarter through one work program or like one 1 year? what is that? we need in put the from staff on that so how do we do it so one 1 person is totally focused for a good period of time just on the landmark program. i think that's the only way we are going to roll this off this program and going forward because right now we keep adding to it and we are not adding enough to be taken off it. >> we have one fte. >> not added but under prehistory k
landmark designation is one. >> that's right. it's not one dedicated person. it's through a several members of our is survey. they are also working on is survey, historic preservation historic committee, there is a wide variety of other commitments aside from designation. >> currently how do we split this us? is there a certain number of hours that we are doing towards the work program that we track or anything like that? how are we doing this now in >> we are tracking it through the quarterly reports that you receive and as mary went through the quarterly report in july we have identified some new performance measures to help that we will be showing you at the next or the first quarter now that we are in the new fiscal year which i think we will be bringing that in the
first nearing october, middle of september. the next hearing september 17th we'll share those performance measures with you and see how the commission would like to track this fte in the future and maybe we can have a discussion about how that fte is allocated. one small comment that i have regarding these proposals here is like other permit review or other time sensitive review, we may want to capitalize on the momentum that these projects have already gained considering we have support from a wide variety of constituents including the supervisors in each of these districts. it may make sense to prioritize theme. we are making progress on the
other properties listed on the program. as you know, there isn't a time sensitive nature other than trying to get them to you in a timely manner. here the property or the tennants and own done some of the legwork for us and we may want to capitalize on that since we can move these forward a lot more quickly than oochlts >> it it is good to have that already done. i agree. >> the landmark designation, that is for the work program exclusively, right? because the is survey is under a separate category, it's still under the work program. >> that is correct. >> then we have 1.5 for the privately initiated. we have 1.15 for our work program, basically. is that a correct reading of
that? >> yes. for the line no. 5 item for that budget for the historic fund preservation committee project. we have work in excess of that fine committee. a small portion used by that allocation for use by the committee with a proposal such as this one. just to clarify again, line item 8 and line item 4 and line item 5 are pretty much done by the three staff members we have as part of the is survey and designation team. >> right. because i think it would be helpful to have the work plan then if we looked at it in all the projects instead of identifying let's say if you took this number of hours and started looking at how many hours it takes with
the schedule that relates "the hours" with the fte's that we have then we'll get some sense of how quickly we might accomplish the plan. because otherwise it's like yes, it sounds like a plan. i would say i'm very supportive of adding these two to the work plan. the goldberg building is fantastic and it's a great building. the ladies home is a property tax that we don't have on the work plan. the fact that it was a home for seniors for very low income and even in that part of the city are very few landmarks and i'm very supportive of both of those. >> commissioner john's? >> i think we should have this issue placed on the agenda to get the proper focus that it needs and there may be some folks in the p be who would have
some suggestions or some observations about how this really should be accomplished. >> commissioner hyland? >> this is a question for staff. in your staff report you said the one fte that we requested had not been additional. >> that would have been in addition to that and we were hoping that was going to be dedicated. >> that's the question i keep asking. >> so there is one existing ft exterior wall that -- f te that has been budgeted for the last three 3 years. staff requested one additional fte that was granted and working on solely one dell nation. -- designation. we are working on our finance and admin team to find responsibilities
around to achieve that without adding another person. i think at the september 17th hearing we'll be able to give you more concrete information on that. >> maybe that's where we can take it up. >> i do think we need to focus on this on a more formal way. >> it sounds to me on the point of clarification. we'll bring this program back to you and maybe there is cause to reprioritize on that. >> and i'm sorry. i have to reread this. we are not voting, just recommending. we know we are going to add these two and recommend to the list. exactly. we will take that as a consensus and bring this up again when we have a broader communication about prioritization. we are going to close on these two items. mr. frye, you have one more comment? >> sorry, tim frye,
department staff. if the commission can clarify, would you like us to do some additional research on the ladies home? it appears to me several of your objectives for your work program, but we don't have a lot of information so we don't know definitively whether or not -- >> is there a priority for this? we have a number of projects that have been sitting on that list that i think deserve attention. if there is a priority, then, i think we should. >> the question is that it doesn't even qualify for the work program. >> i think it does. >> i think the staff wanted to do more confirmation. >> we can visit the site and have additional research on the property and have the information for the next hearing or have some discussion. i would like some direction from you all. yes, you are right it will
take away the time we are spend frth existing work property. >> how much time? >> i will defer to miz -- ms. brown on how much time. >> it depends on how much you want. i haven't been inside of the building. it's probably part of the landmark report. we are obviously very busy with the many different competing projects. i think there is not a pressing need at this point other than that what tim pointed out in what the building that is support of supervisor david campos, there were 200 signatures in preserving the building. >> i would recommend the check. you don't want to go back in six 6 months and talk about the exteriors where they happen to be